Screenwriting : Which person perspective is best for writing by Nikki April Lee

There is no character perspective, UNLESS you write a specific character POV. WE SEE & WE FOLLOW shouldn't be used in amateur spec scripts. The rules that apply to produced scripts, or those written by writer/directors are different to those for us ordinary mortals. A screenplay is a series of images. SHOW us what happens.

They're right, screenplays are written third person present tense - pretty much from the point of view of what the audience sees and hears. The one exception is voice over. It's the closest you'll get to first person and being inside the character's head. Be careful though, it can be seen as a sign of weakness for a writer. A good writer should be able convey a story without leaning too heavily to voice over. But it is one more tool and has been masterfully used in movies like MEMENTO, where the viewer later learns that the character's perceptions are inaccurate and what the shocking truth really is. In later drafts of "CASTAWAY," the character Wilson the volleyball was added as a clever way to convey Tom Hanks' feelings and thoughts without having to resort to voice over. Good luck, and I hope this helps.

But always avoid writing WE SEE or WE HEAR in a screenplay — it pulls us out of the story. It's like writing CAMERA MOVEMENTS - let the director direct the film and pick the visuals - you TELL THE STORY. Just write the scene - we are the reader/audience so if we are supposed to hear SOUND as the audience - as it happens - by the mere fact you write that it happens and bring it to our attention - we are supposed to hear it. "WE SEE Carl enter the bar" should just be "CARL enters the bar."

Mark you have made some good points...which apply especially for spec scripts...shooting scripts carry all of that detail work....2 different animals of the same species like the raccoon and the olinguito...are the spec and shooting scripts.

Skype is a useful tool for casting.

As a reader, nothing drives me crazier than "WE SEE" or any of its derivatives! Don't tell me what WE SEE or HEAR show me what is seen and heard! If you want your script to succeed the reader needs to forget she is sitting at her desk (or in bed in her pj's) and see and feel and hear what is happening in the script.When you tell them WE SEE, it takes the reader out of the story and right back into real life.

Here is a cool trick. If your script is already written with a billion "we see"s, Hit Ctrl + F, to open the find box. Type inside "we see" , whenever it finds you a situation where you wrote that, restructure the line in your head to "show us", replace it on your script, then go to the next and the next until you don't have any left!

Here's why you should avoid the use of these 2 little words: http://screenplaysuccess.blogspot.com/2013/08/why-we-see-sucks.html

I use "We See" once as in SCENE.EVENING.INT.OFFICE. We see an old man slumped over his desk, accolades on the wall behind him. If I have a breakaway such as a person coming up a staircase to this Scene. I use INSERT. Staircase.Female coming up steps Then when I want to go back to the old man in the office I write Back to Scene. old man looks up surprised to see woman enter office. OLD MAN you startled me WOMAN You look like you saw a ghost The next time I use "We See" would be a new SCENE where it will be written SCENE.etc,etc,etc We see........ This helps to follow along settings, without so much creative crowding for the director. Who ultimately is the one who will get the 'point of the scene/story across'. I am sure this is not the way someone was taught in school, but it works for me and seems to flow when others read it (Actors). Another thing I stay away from is using que's for my actors. It is kinda of insulting to tell them to act (pouty) if the scene calls for it. There are Youtube videos that will teach you Warner Bros preferred script layout if that is who you are writing for or submitting to. Just use Google it is a great tool with the right search phrases. I use Celtx to write with BTW. Hope this helps Best Simon

@ Simon. IMO there is no need to use WE SEE in the example you use. It's a given that we see the old man, an old man is slumped over a desk. WE, are also not there.

'We see' is outdated and not used. Write in third person present, what the audience sees.

Yes, but Laura, they all either produced their own stuff or had major pull in the industry so a reader doesn't have to fall in love with the script before it gets passed up the food chain. It is a very different world for us spec writers.

@ Laura They are produced - they could write in crayon on the back of a cereal box and there isn't a producer or studio that would bat an eyelid. Besides, did you read the spec they turned in, or the published shooting script? There is absolutely no logical reason to write 'WE SEE' . . .naturally we see, we are looking at a series of pictures on a screen. It adds nothing to the action description. A spec writers script has to be BETTER in terms of format than any credited writer and using WE SEE etc just shows sloppy writing.

@ Laura. The audience doesn't read your script. If you advocate WE SEE etc to a writer, where do they draw the line when using it. At start of every of action description, a WE SEE could be used. Is the reader, exec etc reading this out loud to an audience? No. I don't see any circumstances where removing WE SEE will make a screenplay worse, but I can see plenty, where adding them in does. To me, it logical under that 'rule' that they are better avoided. As for Woody Allen, I'm afraid I have never read any of his material, but for me, his films are more misses than hits. If other people find them entertaining, great. And Mr. Sorkin, granted, very successful, we should be so lucky, but if recycles his dialogue this often: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S78RzZr3IwI then WE SEE isn't going to trouble him too much . . . As for the Shane Black spec sales, I'm afraid that's a thing of the past. Spec sales these days are few and far between. Besides, what applied 20 and 30 years ago, doesn't today. I mean, you're hardly go to offer up script from the silent ear as examples of how to write today.

@ Catherine - good for him.

He is Brilliant....

Very well said Eoin. Again, if it adds nothing to the script, leave it out. Your story is better off with out it, so even though your screenplay might not get a PASS because of a few "we see"s why bother?

@ Laura So, not only are you advising the use of WE SEE, you're now recommending the use of specific shots? As you said, the writer's job is to tell (or more specifically show) a story. Shots of any kind are not required. I'm sure the director will be delighted to know you're doing his/her job for them and the reader too. My name is Eoin, not Eion . . .

@ Laura There were a whole slew of bankers who thought they knew everything and wouldn't listen to anyone until they were responsible for crashing the world stock market, maybe the fact that they were paid large salaries and no one ever complained about their work gave them a sense of self justification, who knows . . . good luck to you Laura. It's still EOIN btw

Hey guys, no need to get hostile. We are all here to learn from each other and support each other in this crazy business. Please treat each other with respect.

@ Laura are John & Craig going to be ones reading the scripts submitted by spec writers? Nope. I'm glad you felt compelled to Google and check for an IMDB profile, I didn't. Every spec writer is 'fledgling' until they make a sale, not an option. @ Tracy No aggression here, I can assure you, but Laura seems hell bent on her personal crusade and passive aggressiveness with some name mis spelling.

@ Laura I ignored the mis spelling the first time. When you did it multiple times, even after pointing it out, that, to me, says something. If, however, I took offense the first time, then that would say something about how my mind works. But, apology accepted. If the sky is blue and I say it is, do I need to be a meteorologist for it to be true? My opinion doesn't come from what other people say, it comes from reading scripts everyday. Regardless of them being good or bad in story, plot, structure, tone, character development etc, I can see no reason where WE SEE makes action description more clear to the reader. It's redundant. As for a 'rule' in relation to WE SEE, I have never said there is one.

I'm reading James Cameron's Avatar screenplay and he uses "we are", "we see", and "us." I'll admit it does throw me off abit but it doesn't bother. But them again he directed his on film so he could do that if he wanted to.

Ladies and Gentleman, just write your scripts.

Have a read of Django Unchained - that's as novelistic as it gets and full of asides and unfilmables. No spec writer would be able to put their name to that script and have someone get past the first 10 pages.

It's highly advisable for new writers to adhere to spec screenplay writing rules. The established writers can break the rules, but new writers must prove they know the rules before being allowed to break them. When a new writer pens a "novelistic" scrip, it's usually discarded with the belief that the writer hasn't studied his/her craft.

If your STORY and writing is smooth and quick then a reader will overlook minor problems. If it is not then they will delete it for any reason they can come up with. The whole "we see" argument is a waste of time. Some people don't mind it in a script, others do. Why take a chance your story is going into the trash bin just because some intern hates the wording? If you are an aspiring writer just follow the rules.

Because that 'intern' (usually a reader), is hired to say no. Truth. Because they are risking their job by going to bat for your script. If they find an actual winner, they have to justify kicking it upward. Because it makes more sense for them to say no. Because that reader is the first, and often only, person that will be reading your script.

Interesting post on Facebook today to add to the discussion http://screenplaysuccess.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/why-we-see-sucks.html.

The above example is somewhat absurd. I cringe to think an actual spec writer would use that many "we see". I would probably use "series of shots" to describe all that action, but then I'm not a PRO. Like the article said, he didn't have to go thru a script reader.

third person objective author is the correct answer.

Wayne, can you imagine what would happen if you put a script like that in front of a reader? 32 "we sees" in a single script is an absurd example, but it does show the superfluousness of that sort of writing.

Last word: When writing that screen play you write what you are seeing you are not telling a short story don't Tell.. SHOW .instead of INT. BARBERSHOP - DAY We see Steve getting a haircut. Write; INT. BARBERSHOP - DAY Steve is getting his haircut. first bad, second GOOD....that is if you want to get pass the first reader. You are not Quentin or Elmore (RIP) so Do the right (write) thing. That pouty look can get you only so far. Just kidding...LOL keep writing and good luck ...

I would write it in an active way as opposed to passive: INT. BARERSHOP - DAY Steve gets a haircut.

I don't even use "We see" just, Steve is getting a haircut

I agree M.S....active is better. I'm writing and You made me go back and check for active voice. Thanks....

you wouldn't say "steve is getting a haircut." INT. BARBERSHOP - DAY An old bald woman trims Steve's bangs. at any rate, avoid the use of auxiliary verbs such as "is"

Present simple, John walks, over, Present Continuous, John is walking. Everything on films happens now.

I think most of the people who are referencing "published" SPs and SWs are looking at SHOOTING scripts, or at least a 'WORKING" script...more so than a SPEC script. If you as a SW have not been commissioned to write a SP you will be undoubtedly be writing and submitting to be read a SPEC script. And in "SPECS " short for speculative, I believe. you do not do certain things that are standard in SHOOTING scripts...that's just a fact. One of those things is you don't give camera or stage direction and you are describing the action in active present. There ARE industry standards. Do not be mislead. It just makes it easier. If everyone just wrote all willy nilly nothing would ever get made. Come on People. Young lady put down AVATAR and read SAVE THE CAT by BLAKE SYNER may he RIP...and or any number of great SW 101 books by syd Field...let's move on if we can. Learn by doing. Or teach. Just kidding. LOL

well said Charles. I especially the willy nilly part ;)

Interesting that this came up today on Scriptmag: http://www.scriptmag.com/features/specs-the-city-we-see-and-heat-the-bre...